I Adjacent transpositions: question about definition

AI Thread Summary
Adjacent transpositions in permutations refer to swaps between neighboring elements based on their fixed positions, not their current arrangement after previous transpositions. For example, in the set <1,2,3>, the transpositions (1,2) and (2,3) are valid regardless of the changes made by earlier swaps. Even after applying (1,2) to get <2,1,3>, the transposition (2,3) still applies to the original positions, making it an adjacent transposition. This definition can be counterintuitive, as it suggests that the adjacency is based on initial positions rather than the current state of the permutation. The discussion clarifies that the notation for transpositions is consistent, focusing on the fixed elements rather than their dynamic relationships.
nomadreid
Gold Member
Messages
1,750
Reaction score
243
Question: In defining adjacent transpositions in a permutation as swaps between neighbors, is one referring to the original set or to the last result before the transposition is applied? I clarify with an example.
Suppose one assumes a beginning ordered set of <1,2,3>
It is clear that (1,2) (2,3), and (1,3) are the adjacent transpositions for <1,2,3>
However, if I compose them (2,3)(1,2), I first apply the transposition (1,2) to <1,2,3> I now have <2,1,3> and now 2 and 3 are no longer neighbors. So is (2,3) still considered an adjacent transposition?
According the the definitions I find on the Internet, it appears that the answer is yes, but this goes contrary to the intuition of sapping neighbors at each step.
Thanks.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Initial statement: (1,3) - end points - adjacent. After trans. (2,3) - end points - not adjacent. Doesnt look right.
 
mathman said:
Initial statement: (1,3) - end points - adjacent. After trans. (2,3) - end points - not adjacent. Doesnt look right.
Thanks, mathman. I am not sure which part doesn't look right to you. I picked a short example, but perhaps a longer example would be appropriate. (I can give the source if desired.)
adjacent.png
 
nomadreid said:
So is (2,3) still considered an adjacent transposition?
According the the definitions I find on the Internet, it appears that the answer is yes, but this goes contrary to the intuition of swapping neighbors at each step.
Thanks.
The numbers in the transposition are fixed dummy variables. ##(2,3)## always means the same thing: swap the second and third elements in the permutation. It does not mean "swap the numbers 2 and 3, wherever they may be". You can look at ##(2, 3)## as the mapping:
$$(2, 3): (x, y, z) \rightarrow (x, z, y)$$
 
Super! Thanks, PeroK. That clears up the confusion. Question answered!.
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Is it possible to arrange six pencils such that each one touches the other five? If so, how? This is an adaption of a Martin Gardner puzzle only I changed it from cigarettes to pencils and left out the clues because PF folks don’t need clues. From the book “My Best Mathematical and Logic Puzzles”. Dover, 1994.
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top